I don't think the front page would look like
this if they believed Biden is coasting toward victory.
Front-page headlines/subheads that support my intuition: "Anxious but determined, Americans are pushing through challenges like the pandemic and long lines to cast their ballot," "A Frazzled World Holds Its Breath While the U.S. Chooses Its Leader," "The Day After Election Day/Current and former Trump administration officials are worried about what might happen on Nov. 4," "Fueled by Cash, Health Care and Trump’s Woes, Democrats Aim for Senate Control," "Trump Has Made the Whole World Darker," "How Lincoln Survived the Worst Election Ever/There are many parallels between 1860 and 2020. Let’s hope there aren’t too many," "Don’t Fool Yourself. Trump Is Not an Aberration."
Where's Biden? There are a couple mentions of the disappearing man: "Some Older Voters Shift to Biden in Florida. Will It Be Enough for Him?/Polls suggest some retirees are shifting from having supported President Trump to voting for Joseph R. Biden Jr. But they are rare in Florida’s Republican heartland," "A last puzzle piece: Whether Joe Biden has a significant or modest lead comes down to Pennsylvania."
There hasn't been talk of a Biden "landslide" in a long time. I think there's more of a desperate hope that he can hang on and discomfiture that Trump is still there, staying alive, never accepting that he was doomed. It's a hero's story for Trump, and that's got to hurt.
Here's Frank Bruni, 2 days ago, which I found searching the NYT archive for "Biden" and "landslide":
I could be overreacting. Maybe, just ahead, there will be moments of grace, enough of them to redeem us. Maybe I’ll look up on or after Nov. 3 and see that Biden has won North Carolina, has won Michigan, has won every closely contested state and the presidency in a landslide.
Maybe I’ll have to eat my words.
Please, my fellow Americans, feed me my words. I’d relish that meal.
I also saw the word "landslide" in this letter to the editor on October 28, under the heading "It’s Biden! No, It’s Trump! Here Are Your Predictions
Our readers suggest a wide range of scenarios that include landslides, pardons, claims of fraud, violence and the courts":
Joe Biden eventually wins a landslide in the popular vote but on election night the vote looks close enough for President Trump to claim that he won. The Electoral College is close and is manipulated by Republican governors and legislators to swing a “win” for Mr. Trump. Legal challenges ensue, and the Supreme Court gives the presidency to Mr. Trump. The Senate barely keeps a Republican majority. There is violence in the streets, and the country is further ripped apart in despair and factionalism. Democracy as we know it no longer exists.
"Landslide" is merely an element in a Trump-victory fever dream.
I could do the same thing with The Washington Post. Here's how the front page there looks right now. Click to enlarge and clarify and maybe you'll be able to find the word "Biden" — it's there, just hard to see. "Trump" is popping up all over:
Posts
91 comments:
Did you notice the Stanford study in the lower left corner of the WaPo front-page screenshot?
I clicked on that so you don't have to: "A new study from Stanford University estimates that 18 of Trump’s recent large-scale campaign rallies ultimately resulted in 30,000 confirmed cases of the coronavirus and probably led to more than 700 deaths among attendees and others infected by them."
Polls suggest some retirees are shifting from having supported President Trump to voting for Joseph R. Biden Jr. But they are rare in Florida’s Republican heartland
Wait, what!?
They’ve been telling us for months that old people are abandoning Trump en mass over his handling of COVID. Now it’s “some,” maybe?
Ann Althouse said...Did you notice the Stanford study in the lower left corner of the WaPo front-page screenshot?
“18 of Trump’s recent large-scale campaign rallies ultimately resulted in 30,000 confirmed cases of the coronavirus and probably led to more than 700 deaths among attendees and others infected by them."
The phrase, “my ass” comes to mind.
Can we depend on the media honestly to report the results? Suppose they make up a Biden landslide out of whole cloth.
I did not notice, and I don't believe it.
Yahoo's top story for the past few weeks has been a constant variation on the theme that Trump is deliberately attempting to murder his own constituency.
I get daily emails from the NYT with recipes. Today's was "Comfort and Consoling Food".
Consoling? Hmmmmmm.
How Lincoln Survived the Worst Election Ever/There are many parallels between 1860 and 2020.
Never ever discount what crazed actors are capable of doing to duly elected Presidents.
I believe the "30,000 confirmed cases" as much as I believed the "260,000 confirmed cases" after the Sturgis rally (later amended to maybe 290 cases)!
God the NYT's is trashy.
A Frazzled World Holds Its Breath While the U.S. Chooses Its Leader
I'm guessing the frazzled world believes the polls their own media have been reporting, which are probably just recycled American news articles. They can't look around their town and see that sentiment runs counter to the polls. If so, I think they'll be especially stunned on Wednesday morning with a Trump win. I half-expect rioting in capitols around the world.
They are pessimistic that Biden will be elected, but hopeful that they can spread social contagion to recycle, reuse 16 trimesters of marginally successful witch hunts, warlock trials, and protests to force a Twilight period where people will voluntarily kneel.
"A new study from Stanford University estimates..."
Estimates? Models? Hopes? Dreams? Conflation of causes? Cases of past, present, probable, or possible? Social contagion? Perhaps, this time, they picked the correct distribution and parameters. That said, whether immune or otherwise, infections will happen. The concern is whether the virus is viable and the disease will progress in otherwise healthy individuals, and whether 80 to 90% of the 1 to 2% with comorbidities will receive early, out-patient treatment to reduce excess deaths.
Wow the WAPO is even trashier than the NYT's.
Your tribe is trash Althouse.
Your desperate need to be better than us based on your associations is looking pretty tattered.
How about dealing with the State of Wisconsin extraditing and imprisoning a 17 year old without bail for obvious self defense?
Kyle Rittenhouse is worth going to war over.
"probably"
Well - that is some hard and fast Hunter Biden penis news.
I clicked on that so you don't have to: "A new study from Stanford University estimates that 18 of Trump’s recent large-scale campaign rallies ultimately resulted in 30,000 confirmed cases of the coronavirus and probably led to more than 700 deaths among attendees and others infected by them."
You write that as if it's a bad thing for the TDS-afflicted.
Is that Stanford study the "weekend surprise" the NYT was supposed to drop?
"Covid, Covid, Covid, Covid, Covid, Covid, Covid, Covid, Covid, Covid..."
I mean, the commenter Chuck Wilkes Booth always gave me the impression that he would relish the death of Trump and Trump supporters.
If we can have football games, then we can have election rallies. Stay away if you want.
How about dealing with the State of Wisconsin extraditing and imprisoning a 17 year old without bail for obvious self defense?
Due process. Has he been tried and convicted yet? I'm not seeing much Biden support here in Trumpealeau County.
Never ever discount what crazed actors are capable of doing to duly elected Presidents.
Is anyone keeping an eye on Robert Deniro?
Reminds me of the Sturgis motorcycle gathering study, which turned out to be BS.
Give it a day or two.
They don't even hide it any more.
"A new study from Stanford University estimates that 18 of Trump’s recent large-scale campaign rallies ultimately resulted in 30,000 confirmed cases of the coronavirus and PROBABLY led to more than 700 deaths among attendees and others infected by them."
PROBABLY = #SCIENCE!
"Did you notice the Stanford study in the lower left corner of the WaPo front-page screenshot?"
Oh no!! Did you hear about Sturgis? I think it was three hundred thousand cases and around a billion dead!
My daughter’s sorority cancelled their weekly meeting - zoom meeting - next week for “mental health.”
The future is bright!
Kyle Rittenhouse is worth going to war over.
Yup.
Trump's closing argument is that COVID is no big deal, after all, he recovered, and doctors are fraudulently inflating the death count for $$. But I'm sure Dr. Michael has no problems with this.
It's going to be interesting to see which media outlet comes closest to calling for armed insurrection once the landslide is underway.
Free therapeutics for all with a 99.5% recovery rate is fact. Moo
Ann Althouse said...
Did you notice the Stanford study in the lower left corner of the WaPo front-page screenshot?
I clicked on that so you don't have to: "A new study from Stanford University estimates that 18 of Trump’s recent large-scale campaign rallies ultimately resulted in 30,000 confirmed cases of the coronavirus and probably led to more than 700 deaths among attendees and others infected by them."
And the BLM/Antifa protestors were made completely immune to COVID.
Democrats and the WAPO and the NYT think that if you are against Trump you cannot catch a virus.
They have repeatedly said this.
They are "trashy."
The media are facing a historic reckoning. Even if Biden squeezes in after weeks of carefully orchestrated violence, a very big if, they have earned and richly deserve what happens next. They bet the house and a year's worth of milk money on a worn-out old man with cognitive difficulties in the understanding he would be replaced by the California left-winger who couldn't win a single primary. In greasing the skids for Trump, the media has earned the hatred and contempt of easily half the country. The legitimacy and the trust are gone, never to be regained. We don't need them anymore for anything. With the circus ringmaster gone taking the economic revival with him, who would pay for their garbage?
I sense a disturbance in the Force, as if millions of SJWs were screaming in pain and at the heavens.
“I clicked on that so you don't have to: "A new study from Stanford University estimates that 18 of Trump’s recent large-scale campaign rallies ultimately resulted in 30,000 confirmed cases of the coronavirus”
You can estimate a potential case, but estimating a confirmed case is true wizardry.
To the Iowa residents...Will Trump and Ernst have the same result?
Did I miss the Stanford study on COVID cases from the “mostly peaceful” protests?
Did I miss the warning that the left shouldn’t protest after Trump is re-elected so as not to spread the virus?
Or is this all bullshit, like it’s always been.
Read Holman Jenkins in the WSJ today. Hint: it’s all bullshit.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-other-media-blackout-11604094677?st=ixa9jy1sofit0nd&reflink=article_copyURL_share
" resulted in 30,000 confirmed cases of the coronavirus and probably led to more than 700 deaths among attendees and others infected by them."
So there was no science involved then, since those numbers would mean a death rate about 100 times what Covid-19 produces, and that's if you believe the 30K infection rate cited in a study that far off on the science.
Nope
I’m repeating my 2016 frame of mind and planning on a Biden victory. If Trump pulls it off, it will be that much sweeter. I’m telling my Facebook orange man bad friends that they only have 80 days left of suffering. If I have to reset the timer to 2025, some of them, I suspect, will literally crumble.
I’m working the polls on Tuesday so the real old folks don’t have to.
That Trump cost them their innocence indicates that they had one of the most protected upbringings in history.
"I believe the "30,000 confirmed cases" as much as I believed the "260,000 confirmed cases" after the Sturgis rally (later amended to maybe 290 cases)!"
Grudgingly amended to 290 cases out over 400,000 people who attended, and from the video I saw very few masks were worn. That might translate into 1 death, which is probably way down the list of causes of death in those who attended. Five died in traffic accidents, but they were probably counted as Covid anyway.
Not only is our media incapable of reporting any news that not politically beneficial to the left, our universities are now incapable of producing data that's not. The left is such a force for good.
" resulted in 30,000 confirmed cases of the coronavirus and probably led to more than 700 deaths among attendees and others infected by them.
actually, this is par for the course; the key word (as noted) is "probably".
Of 9 million confirmed cases in the US; they found that 30,000 of those had gone to a rally
ipso facto.... their attendance at the rally "probably" resulted in their catching covid
[how ELSE could they have gotten it!]
of the people known to have gone to the rallies, 700 have died (from something? old age?)
and THAT means that they "probably" died from covid, which was a "result" of the rally
get it?
numbers are fun!
The Electoral College is close and is manipulated by Republican governors and legislators to swing a “win” for Mr. Trump.
Hmm. Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and North Carolina have Democrat governors.
Ohio, Iowa, Georgia, Arizona and Florida have GOP governors, but if it's gonna turn into a cheatfest, I'd rather have the Dem governor portfolio.
"A new study from Stanford University estimates ...“
The faith that gullible people have in unvalidated mathematical models is touching. But until a model is carefully validated against real data from the real world, it’s nothing better than pulling numbers out of your ass. When the real world does not match your mathematical model, it is not the real world that is wrong!
Blogger steve uhr said...
Trump's closing argument is that COVID is no big deal, after all, he recovered, and doctors are fraudulently inflating the death count for $$. But I'm sure Dr. Michael has no problems with this.
steve, unlike you, I know a bit about viruses. The SARS-2, which is the correct name for this virus, is a much more successful parasite than SARS-1, which had a 23% mortality rate. This one has about a 1% or 1.5% mortality that is shifted mostly to the elderly and this with co-morbidities. You would do well to read that WSJ link above about about how the number of people infected is about 10 times the official total because most cases are asymptomatic and they don't seek testing.
As for inflating, it is not the death count that is inflated but the case count. The tendency for health departments to inflate the number of deaths due to the virus is well known and will be revised eventually. Even though the case count is inflated by politicians, the total is far higher with the asymptomatic cases.
I mean, the commenter Chuck Wilkes Booth always gave me the impression that he would relish the death of Trump and Trump supporters.
I imagine CWB holding Trump in a basement somewhere, making Trump do a deposition about Stormy Daniels payments and bank fraud.
Remember when that was going to be the end?
steve uhr said...Trump's closing argument is that COVID is no big deal, after all, he recovered, and doctors are fraudulently inflating the death count for $$.
Steve,
Do you understand the difference between dying OF Covid and dying WITH Covid?
Ask honest medical professionals and they will tel you that hospitals get paid more for deceased people who are diagnosed with Covid, regardless of the cause of death.
So yes. The death count is certainly inflated.
So the Dems may have to use those trunk loads of emergency votes after all?
From the The Economist's editorial endorsing Biden:
"Faced by an outpouring of peaceful protest after the killing of George Floyd, [Trump's] instinct was not to heal, but to depict it as an orgy of looting and left-wing violence—part of a pattern of stoking racial tension."
"On the hard problems—on North Korea and Iran, and on bringing peace to the Middle East—Mr Trump has fared no better than the Washington establishment he loves to ridicule."
No mention of the Russia hoax or the politicization of the FBI, CIA, etc.
From the The Economist's editorial endorsing Biden:
"Faced by an outpouring of peaceful protest after the killing of George Floyd, [Trump's] instinct was not to heal, but to depict it as an orgy of looting and left-wing violence—part of a pattern of stoking racial tension."
"On the hard problems—on North Korea and Iran, and on bringing peace to the Middle East—Mr Trump has fared no better than the Washington establishment he loves to ridicule."
No mention of the Russia hoax or the politicization of the FBI, CIA, etc.
The AMA has come out about Trump's statement on the fraudulent Covid death count. They said the statements were "misguided", but then offered no scientific evidence to support that, ignoring the CDC's numbers showing 6% of "Covid deaths" due to Covid alone. The AMA like many formerly responsible organizations have become political arms of the Left.
A MUST SEE!... https://www.reddit.com/r/ConservativeMemes/comments/jjyuai/white_democrats_then_like_now_just_want_black/
The Trump campaign calls their rallies Peaceful Protests.
And everyone knows that taking part in any protest, whether it is peaceful or only mostly peaceful, confers immunity to COVID-19.
Therefore, the Stanford Study is malarkey.
I wouldn't read too much into the New York Times.
I do mean that literally.
The Electoral College is close and is manipulated by Republican governors and legislators to swing a “win” for Mr. Trump.
This is a theme I'm seeing in the attacks on the EC. What, exactly, are they charging here? That Republican governors of states that vote Democratic are appointing faithless electors to ignore the will of the voters and vote for the Republican instead?
That seems to be the claim. It should be pretty easy to prove and surely would cause an uproar, even among Republicans.
So which states is the Times accusing? Given the scenario, there’s only a handful of possible culprits. It should be pretty easy to identify the governors. What has the Times' investigation turned up?
Or are they lying to their readers again, as they so often do? Because they think their readers are stupid (about which they are mostly right.
A couple weeks ago a Tik Tok with Fleetwood Mac’s “Dreams” was pretty popular.
Maybe next week someone will do one with “Landslide”.
To All here:
Hear me now and believe me later:
1. The next POTUS is Biden. The next VPOTUS is Harris. After 11/3, the US Press will make Kamala a household name. She will be Michelle Obama was but multiple that by million times. Hollywood will have a permanent presence in DC.
2. Trump will be shamed by press into his FL house where he will get sick and be forgotten. No one will remember or care for him.
3. Speaker is Pelosi and Senate leader is Schumer.
4. GOP is out of business for 12 to 16 years.
5. Warren is the Treasury Sec and she will create history for Native Americans. Press forgives her.
Cheers!
To be a bit more serious, we are in a very strange place as far as this election is concerned.
On a fundamental level, the polls don't seem to make a lot of sense. And there's a reason for this: what worked for polling twenty years ago does not work anymore. Ace of Spades has an article by "Dave from Florida" going into detail here:
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/391031.php
To highlight one major issue, twenty years ago everyone had land lines and when pollsters called those land lines about 50% the people were willing to answer the questions. Now the response rate is 2%. Yes, two (2) percent. And the 2% are heavily tilted towards certain parts of the electorate, so it is not a random sample anymore. Pollsters, if they really care which is not assured, have to do all sorts of weighing to get something that might match reality. Weighing is educated guesswork. As we learned in 2016 and 2018, they are not doing a great job of it. This is further complicated by the facts that the polls have become a partisan issue. Not only do certain sectors believe the polls are "rigged" to some extent - and they are not necessarily wrong - so they refuse to cooperate or simply lie. And then there is the matter that telling a pollster the wrong thing and then getting revealed because the poll was not a real poll is a real risk. There are lots of people who don't want to take that risk.
If you look at the "non-standard" polls and the fundamentals models, not to mention anecdotal information from people on the ground, they typically say Trump is going to win or at least this is a touch and go thing. So do you believe the polls or do you believe the fundamentals? There is certainly quite a bit of confirmation bias involved in which one you prefer, but when two different types of measurements are supposed to point in the same general direction and they don’t, something is very wrong.
Furthermore, this election has been, if anything, unique. 2020 has included:
1. A pandemic that has caused a major upheaval of everyone’s lives, wrecking the strongest economy in a generation, only for the economy roar back.
2. Rioting in major cities which have sometimes lasted for months.
3. Politicians overtly supporting rioters over the police. In NYC, the politicians are overtly supporting ordinary criminals over the police.
4. Sports leagues, of all organizations, taking overt political positions to their detriment.
5. A major presidential candidate who basically refused to campaign for months, called it quits in the morning for at least 10 days in October, shows signs of significant mental decline, and now is performing rallies in front of literally dozens of people, often with most of them being media.
6. A media which has openly refused to do its job, suppressing stories that do not benefit their desired result and shouting about what can only be described as conspiracy theories that they refused to do the minimal due diligence in investigating, We’ve had “major” stories that proved to be nothing, often from anonymous sources. Occasionally, the media will go through the motions of “confirming” the story through other anonymous sources, which is the equivalent of multiplying a bunch of zeroes. We’ve also had a revelation that the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign, perhaps the greatest scandal in the history of the country, and when the media deigns to mention it they claim (dishonestly) that it is a debunked.
What am I left with? The situation is unprecedented. The old rules no longer apply. I’m in a new world that I am still trying to understand, inundated with information of dubious truthfulness and utility being delivered by liars and the confused. Good luck.
It says something that I am not confident about anything. It says even more that, at this late date, this was probably the best case scenario.
I'm watching the Michigan Michigan State game, nationally televised, and presumably with a lot of Michigander eyeballs. I'm flipping between games, but I haven't seen a single Trump add. I've seen one Biden ad a couple times, and that's what I wanted to talk about here. The ad shows Biden talking about Covid, then a voice over "What would BIden do: 1. double testing sites; 2. manufacture personal protective gear in the US; 3. Reopen the White House COVID office." Is this ad as weak as I think it is. It actually makes me less likely to vote for Biden as I see it saying, "Here's a serious problem and we have a symbolic response that will not actually do anything to solve the serious problem. So vote for us."
Another thing I would this to mention is some people are accepting polls with almost a religious fervor. I recently saw - may have been on Twitter a someone question the results of a poll with perfectly valid reasons, and someone else replied that the poll was correct and to prove his point he cited... another poll. It was like watching a religious debate where the Christian argues with an atheist by quoting the Bible.
Supposedly intelligent and educated people have seem to lost grasp of the most basic things.
Supposing Trump wins - which I increasingly see as likely, but I've been very wrong before - will the left blame:
- Russians
- Republican skulduggery and racist voter suppression
- Some new conspiracy not yet made public
- The stupidity and bigotry of a critical mass of American voters
- All of the above
or, Themselves, for choosing a candidate none of them much loved, that none of them could be bothered to make an affirmative case for, and expecting it to be self-evident that they should be back in charge?
I'm just kidding on that last one, they would never do that.
I honestly have no idea how this election is going to turn out. And I don't think anyone else really has either. Maybe the polls are right and Biden is going to Mr. Magoo his way into the presidency! And maybe they're even more wrong than before. Massive early voting, voter registration shifts, sloppy vote by mail implementation, high rejection rates for mail in ballots, fear of contagion -- how do you factor all that into a likely voter screen? It's outside the parameters of whatever model you might have based on past elections.
The Stanford study is exactly what I thought it would be- they appear to have simply took the number of people who attended Trump rallies and multiplied by the confirmed infection rate for the US to get the 30,000 number. Then they took the US's case fatality rate (2.46%) and multiplied that by the 30,000 number to get the 700.
Note- there is no cause and effect here, but I will give you this- it is far more likely that a higher percentage of Biden supporters have had COVID than Trump supporters, just due to the different levels of infections in cities vs rural areas. In short, of the Trump rally attendees, probably no more than 5,000 of them have even been tested positive for COVID at any time, and probably a lot less than that; and they are less likely to die than Biden supporters with COVID given the ethnic divide in mortality.
Shot: I get the feeling the NYT is bracing for a Trump win.
Chaser: Biden Team Cancels Texas Event After Highway ‘Ambush’ by MAGA Cavalry
HOLD THE PHONE! https://www.zerohedge.com/political/abc-news-breaks-mainstream-media-blackout-hunter-biden-story
Bait and switch time is here!
Our readers suggest a wide range of scenarios that include landslides, pardons, claims of fraud, violence and the courts
NYT translation: "Please, please let there be pardons, claims of fraud, violence and court cases...!" (But no violence anywhere near us, please. Kthxbye.)
I want Trump, but whoever wins, I hope it’s by enough that it isn’t going to be dragged out for days.
The AMA like many formerly responsible organizations have become political arms of the Left.
The AMA partnered with the Harvard School of Public Health to rewrite the Medicare rules for billing. This was intended to minimize high technology procedures, a little like Canada has done with their Socialized Medicine. After that the AMA membership dropped like a rock. I think member ship is now less than 20%. They send me bills for dues every month hoping an office manager will pay it. I've been retired for 30 years.
Is voting in federal elections a federally protected civil right?
If so, there is probably sufficient documentable voter fraud in many states to petition in federal court to have that state's electoral votes held in abeyance until voter rolls are cleaned and the election revoted with picture id verification.
I certainly include Texas among those states.
"Covid, Covid, Covid, Covid, Covid, Covid, Covid, Covid, Covid, Covid..."
To be fair, Russia, Russia, Russia has captured more Democrats in its conspiratorial web.
America’s Politico said...
To All here:
Hear me now and believe me later:
Just try not to kill any more spacecraft, Babu. There might be people in it next time.
I agree there's no way to know.
But I'm guessing.
I'm guessing, based on the mail-in trends in swing states and others right now that the rural vote is outperforming.
Urban vote is underperforming. So unless something really big has happened, like rurals voting democrat or urbans voting republican, trump is ahead on the polarized populations/the "bases."
Thus, Trump has to get smoked in the suburbs (which all the polls say will happen) to lose.
I'm leaning for the first time to:
Trump wins FL, NC, AZ, and keeps PA and WI.
Trump flips NV.
Trump loses MI. MN stays democrat by an even smaller margin than last time.
Trump wins election.
My lovely wife Hates Trump. I love him. Two major fights in the past three weeks. If he wins my marriage of 34 years may not last.
HOLD THE PHONE! https://www.zerohedge.com/political/abc-news-breaks-mainstream-media-blackout-hunter-biden-story
Funny, but I can't find that ABC News story on the ABC News website.
there was a link I posted from the crimson, two weeks ago, showing the harvard school of public health's link to a certain chinese donor,
1. Several battleground states have now extended their ballot deadlines by over a week.
2. These same states have also removed the matching signature requirement.
3. These same states have also removed the "must be postmarked" requirement.
4. All of these last minute changes were made by judges and not state legislatures.
Why is no one talking about this. No postmark, no matching signature and can be up to 12 days late??? HTF is that even legal??? Democrats are just going to keep counterfeiting pallets of ballots no matter how massive Trump's lead, until they can shove Biden into the WIN column, and then will shut down all recounts / challenges. WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING TO STOP THIS MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD!!!
AA sez "I get the feeling the NYT is bracing for a Trump win. I don't think the front page would look like this if they believed Biden is coasting toward victory".
Yup. The polls (herded by incompetent failed sports geek, Nate Silver) are wrong again. They undersample Rural Trump supporters and some Trump supporters are shy.
Look at the actual voting data in FLA - the Dems shot their wad with mail-in votes, underperformed nonetheless, and are about to get swamped on Tues, by a red wave.
Trump wins Fla +3.
Trump's gonna keep AZ & NC. He's gonna slightly improve in Wisc, Mich & Pen. He may flip Minn. But the electoral map will look like 2016.
Have a good weekend!
You don't need a weatherman to tell which way the wind blows
Replying to meatpopsicle at 5:22.
I don't want to believe in systematic voter fraud. I understand the circumstances referred to. Here's my personal experience: I requested a vote-by-mail ballot (allowed in my state by any registered voter who asks). I received my ballot and sent it in (dropping it off in a box that had an obvious observer to prevent problems). I received an email saying that my ballot was received (but not yet registered as a vote). So I think my personal experience was okay to this point. But when a person opens the envelope and sees that I voted for Trump, will that person process the ballot, or will that person find a reason to refuse to process the ballot? I am about 10 days into the process, waiting to find an indication that my ballot was actually processed.
Silver lining if Biden wins, all MSM news will be good. "Turned corner on virus, climate change controlled, racial healing, free everything just around the corner" etc.
If a blogger doesn't vote, does anyone care what they think about the election?
America’s Politico: "To All here:
Hear me now and believe me later:"
If I am not mistaken, the "hear me now, believe me later" line originated on Saturday Night Live in a Dana Carvey/kevin Nealon "Hans and Frans" skit.
I've been having trouble posting since a close relative suddenly found she has liver cancer that has spread. She suddenly became weak and for some hours seemed to be at the end. But palliative treatments helped a lot and she got out of bed and went to vote for for Trump but could not because she could not stand in line for an hour. So they'll try again, trying to find a better hour which coincides with the times when she feels somewhat OK. I am very divided in my mind about her going to vote. I know she will not feel good without going because she knows how important this election is and she has 10 grandchildren and wonders what will become of them in Joe Biden's America, devout home-schooled Catholics as they are - but she is not well.
I think that one thing that is happening is that a whole lot of people are coming to the realization that if you vote for Joe Biden you may have to live with the idea that you actually helped put this incredibly corrupt brain damaged party hack in the most powerful political office in the world.
And “Don’t worry, Kamala will be the real President” doesn’t really make everything all right.
The hysteria of the liberal media persuades me that they think Trump is going to win, notwithstanding that they keep touting polls that say Biden is WAY AHEAD. On the other hand, the liberal media is so often so wrong that I am not confident that Trump WILL win. So, of course, vote early and vote often!
But think about this. Four years ago, Trump won the Republican nomination by beating a field that included at least three sitting Senators and four current or former Governors, most of whom were widely respected in their party, and almost all of whom are now supporting Trump for re-election. This year, Biden won the Democrats' nomination because the Party leadership realized that he was the only candidate who didn't repel large segments of the overall electorate. And his VP and likely near-immediate successor is a Senator who didn't win a single Democratic primary. The Republicans could come back quickly from a Presidential loss in 2020 by embracing Trump policies. Could the Democrats come back from a Biden-Harris victory?
I read the NYT daily from about 1985-2005. It was a damn fine paper. Especially during the first Iraq War. I would watch Joint Chiefs of Staffs Colin Powell and General Norman Schwarzkopf give their daily press briefings. What the NYT printed about them was spot-on. Every other media outlet, not so much. Time and Newsweek were the least accurate. Shortly thereafter, The NYT stopped being so objective, so I switched to the WSJ. Why Ann hasn't done so remains a years-long mystery to me.
Haven't seen a NYT front page for years and years. Based on what's on it today, they should be truly embarrassed and ashamed.
Trafalgar's Robert Cahaly: "...What we’re seeing with the Hispanics, the blacks and now the youth vote is starting to move. The Hispanic numbers in both states is 41 for Trump and the African American number in Nevada was 20 and 27 in Florida..."
Trump wins Biden loses!
Wildswan:
But palliative treatments helped a lot and she got out of bed and went to vote for for Trump but could not because she could not stand in line for an hour. So they'll try again, trying to find a better hour which coincides with the times when she feels somewhat OK.
WTF? In NY early voting, the disabled go straight to the head of the line and their caregivers go with them. She shouldn't have had to wait at all. I'm pretty conservative but I think that's a humane rule and would expect it is widespread. I took my folks Thursday to a suburban polling station and it went lickety split. No IDs, though I had their handi placard, my dad is pretty obviously ♿. Who the devil would make such a one wait in line?
Push back on that.
wildswan get her a wheelchair hospice can usually get them delivered quickly
Post a Comment